The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will hear arguments that consider some terms related to deportation policy. The matters under review ask when the federal law that gives the U.S. government the ability to deport noncitizens who are convicted of “an offense related to obstruction of justice” should be used. Specifically, the question surrounds whether using obstruction of justice can be used on matters that aren’t connected to open judicial proceedings or investigations.
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) gives the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the ability to enforce immigration policy, including the automatic deportation of noncitizens convicted of an aggravated felony at the federal or state level. Originally, crimes included as aggravated felonies were limited to a few select serious crimes. However, Congress expanded the list over the years and now includes obstruction of justice on the list of aggravated felonies.
SCOTUS has held that obstruction of justice requires interference with an ongoing proceeding. Therefore, to deport a noncitizen, the obstruction of justice must apply to an ongoing, open investigation.
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) goes one step further, including “interference with an investigation or proceeding that is reasonably foreseeable” to be included in the INA. In this definition, the status of the investigation is expanded, to include what the potential investigation or proceeding may include, interpreted by a reasonable person.
Once the Court hears arguments and comes to a conclusion, the matters will again be considered by immigration judges. They will then determine whether the obstruction of justice offense qualifies for deportation or not.
If you have questions about deportation policy or any other immigration-related issue, contact us at ILBSG. We actively monitor ongoing reviews and updates of U.S. immigration policy to ensure our clients get the right advice for their particular situations. We can help you, too.
